|
IF
anyone ever needed evidence of why industries should not
be allowed to police themselves, the Council of Fashion
Designers of America just provided it.
A week
ago it released its “health initiative,” which it called
the “first step” in helping to ensure the health and
safety of models. The guidelines are aimed at keeping
dangerously thin—perhaps even anorexic—models off the
runway. The recommendations come after the deaths of two
underweight South American models last year and after
observers outside fashion circles voiced concern about
the emaciated look of others.
New York’s
proposal followed Madrid’s decision to set a body mass
minimum for women on the runways and Milan’s
announcement that it intended to develop a nationwide
campaign to fight anorexia.
The CFDA
offered a six-point plan that was about as bold and
decisive as business consultants talking about synergy.
It was pure mumbo jumbo that outlined educational
workshops and the importance of eating your vegetables.
And
that’s a shame. The last thing an industry as creative
and adventurous as fashion needs is for heavy-handed
bureaucrats or zealous activists to step in and try to
dictate the size and shape of the models who walk the
runways and appear in fashion magazines. But if models
continue to look like cadavers, that may be inevitable.
The CFDA,
which represents some of the most influential designers
showing during New York’s fashion week, offers the
following recommendations:
■
Educate
the industry on the early warning signs of eating
disorders.
■
Require
models with eating disorders to get professional help.
(Even after having been diagnosed as anorexic, however,
models would not necessarily be prohibited from walking
the runway—even while in treatment.)
■
No
models under 16 on the runway.
■
No
models under 18 working past midnight at fittings and
photo shoots.
■
No
smoking or alcohol backstage at fashion shows. (Never
mind that smoking in public spaces and the consumption
of alcohol by anyone under 21 are already violations of
New York City
law.)
■
Provide
healthy snacks.
A
PowerPoint presentation on the symptoms of anorexia and
bulimia is not the solution to getting rid of sickly
thin models. Nor can the answer be found in a crudites
platter. As one model agent put it, the industry needs
to start at the top of the pyramid. If there’s no demand
for skeletons on the runway, there won’t be any
skeletons.
Models
are as thin as twigs because that’s what a vast number
of designers and fashion editors want—or at least
tolerate. The industry has always liked thin, and over
time eyes have adjusted to ever shrinking physiques. The
definition of thin has been redefined from the hourglass
to the waif to the toothpick.
Runway
samples for womenswear—and menswear—are substantially
smaller than they once were. If a size 6 was once the
standard, it is now more like a size 2 or even 0. For
menswear, the standard was once about a 40 regular, but
it has shifted to a 38. The silhouettes are even
narrower in Europe. Any woman who has ever been to a
trunk show and tried to slip into runway samples knows
they can be the size of children’s clothes.
If
models want to work, they have to fit the clothes. They
lose weight. The samples get smaller, they lose more
weight.
No one
expects the fashion industry to suddenly declare a size
8 the ideal figure. Where’s the rarified fantasy in
that? Designers like slender figures because culturally
they are equated with wealth and youth. They are the
easiest and most versatile to dress. But would a size 4
look so god-awful on the runway?
The
fashion industry would have folks believe that this
model-weight problem is complicated. But it isn’t. It
isn’t necessary to get into a conversation about eating
disorders. No one should expect designers and stylists
to behave like doctors and diagnose anorexia and make
referrals. The fashion industry shouldn’t function in
loco parentis. That’s the role of actual parents and
guardians, who would do well to think hard about whether
they want to send a 16-year-old off on the fashion
circuit. No one needs to produce a doctor’s note or
calculate body mass index. All that is really necessary
is common sense.
The
fashion industry has to ask itself: Why do we want to be
represented by a model who the average person would
suspect is sick? Why shoot an advertising campaign using
a model that women would pity rather than envy? The
fashion industry likes to point out that a lot of these
models are naturally super-skinny because of their
metabolism, age or genetics. So what? Pear shapes are
natural, too, but the industry has no trouble rejecting
them.
The
industry needs to think of models as women—not as girls,
mannequins, coat hangers or any of the other terms
typically used to describe them. Think of them as women,
and perhaps that’s what they’ll more often resemble.
The
industry also needs to stop hand-wringing, caucusing and
shifting responsibility. If a young woman walks into a
casting call who is 5-10 and a size 0, if she looks
gaunt and emaciated, if her kneecaps are wider that her
thighs, she shouldn’t be hired. Designers regularly tell
models they are too short, fat, exotic, ethnic,
all-American. Surely they can manage to tell a few
models they’re simply too thin. |
